![]()
|
|
||||||||
Subunit of the General
Transcription Factor TFIIE*
(Received for publication, June 7, 1996, and in revised form, June 27, 1996)
From the Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, A234 Langley Hall, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
Homeodomain-containing proteins play a crucial
role as transcriptional regulators in the process of cell
differentiation. The homeodomain performs a dual function in this
regard, acting as a DNA binding domain and participating in
protein-protein interactions that enhance DNA binding specificity or
regulatory activity. Here we describe a homeodomain class-specific
interaction with the
subunit of the general transcription factor
TFIIE. We show that the Antennapedia and Abdominal-B homeodomains bind
to TFIIE
, but the even-skipped homeodomain does not. Using a
two-hybrid assay performed in cultured cells, we demonstrate that the
homeodomain-TFIIE
interaction occurs in vivo. The
Abdominal-B homeodomain is shown to activate transcription in
vitro, and this activation can be blocked with anti-TFIIE
antibody without affecting basal transcription levels. Together with
published data demonstrating an interaction between proteins containing
even-skipped class homeodomains and the TATA-binding protein (Um, M.,
Li, C., and Manley, J. L. (1995) Mol. Cell. Biol. 15, 5007-5016; Zhang, H., Catron, K. M., and Abate-Shen, C. (1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 1764-1769), these
results suggest various homeodomain containing proteins interact with
different general transcription factors, an observation that may have
important implications for transcriptional regulation.
The homeodomain is a structural motif originally defined by homologous sequences found in the Drosophila homeotic selector proteins, a family of proteins responsible for specifying positional identity along the anterior-posterior axis of a developing embryo (1, 2). It is now well established that the homeodomain functions as a DNA binding domain and that homeotic proteins function as transcription factors that regulate the expression of genes necessary for segment identity (3). The homeodomain motif was subsequently found in numerous developmentally regulated proteins from species as diverse as sponges to mammals implying a functionally conserved mechanism of regulating gene expression during development (4). The extraordinary degree of conservation found among homeodomain sequences suggests that they evolved from a common ancestor through gene duplication. Presumably, sequence variations in the homeodomain and the surrounding protein accumulated as the duplicated genes acquired new developmental roles; however, sequence divergence must have also been restricted by molecular interactions necessary for function.
The mammalian Hox genes contain homeodomains that are more similar to the homeodomains found in Drosophila homeotic genes than any other homeodomain sequence. When expressed in fly embryos, some Hox genes can partially substitute for the function of their Drosophila orthologs (5, 6, 7, 8). This is an intriguing observation given that, with few exceptions, the only conserved sequence between orthologous pairs is the homeodomain itself and a short stretch of 6-9 amino acids just amino-terminal to the homeodomain. One explanation for this functional substitution is that the homeodomain, aside from recognizing specific binding sites in target promoters, also participates in interactions with other conserved proteins required for transcriptional regulation of effector genes (9, 10, 11, 12).
One group of highly conserved proteins required for basal levels of transcription in vitro are the general transcription factors (GTFs),1 which form the transcription preinitiation complex. To establish high levels of expression, assembly of the GTFs is thought to be facilitated through protein-protein interactions with sequence specific DNA binding transcription factors (13, 14, 15). Interaction with the GTFs is usually mediated by a regulatory domain in the sequence specific transcription factor; however, these interactions may also involve the DNA binding domain (16, 17, 18). Of particular interest to this study is the recent demonstration that proteins containing either the even-skipped (eve) or Msx-1 homeodomains interact with an essential GTF, the TATA-binding protein (19, 20). Although the exact role of the eve homeodomain remains undefined, it is required mediate the interaction between TBP and the eve repression domain. The binding of the TBP to Msx-1 protein, however, occurs primarily through an interaction with the Msx-1 homeodomain.
Here we extend these reports of homeodomain-GTF interactions by
demonstrating that the Abdominal-B (Abd-B) homeodomain can bind to the
subunit of TFIIE (TFIIE
), but does not interact with TBP.
Moreover, we show that while the diverged homeodomains Antennapedia and
Abd-B interact with TFIIE
, the even-skipped homeodomain does not.
Our data indicate that the Abd-B homeodomain interaction with TFIIE
occurs in vivo and that it can facilitate transcriptional
activation in vitro. These data suggest that homeodomains
mediate interactions with various basal transcription factors in a
class-specific manner, which may have important implications for
transcriptional regulation during development.
All transfection effector plasmids are based
on pHY60-1 (41), which contains sequences encoding the Gal4 DNA binding
domain (amino acids 1-147) cloned 3
of the Rous sarcoma virus long
terminal repeat (RSV LTR). To make RSV-TFIIE
, a
XbaI-HindIII fragment from plasmid His6.IIE
,
encoding a histidine-tagged TFIIE
(a gift from Dr. R. Roeder) was
subcloned into pHY60-1 replacing the existing Gal4 DNA binding domain.
RSV-NHD was made by replacing the Gal4 DNA binding domain of pHY60-1
with a DraI-XbaI fragment from plasmid p
C18
encoding the entire Dfd
AC/Abd-B protein as well as some flanking Dfd
cDNA sequences (25). The plasmid RSV-GN was made by PCR
amplification of a DNA fragment encoding the N domain. The primers used
for this reaction were GCTCTAGATACAATGGACACTATTCG and
CGGGATCCCAGCGCCGTGTTCGT, which also introduced a BamHI and
XbaI site for subsequent ligation into pHY60-1 forming an in
frame fusion with the Gal4 DNA binding domain. Finally, plasmid
RSV-GVP16 was made by substituting a XbaI-HindIII
fragment from pGal4.VP16 (41) containing an in frame fusion of the VP16
acidic activation domain (amino acids 411-456) to the Gal4 DNA binding
domain for a XbaI-BglII fragment spanning the
Gal4 DNA binding domain in pHY60-1.
To make the reporter plasmid
33AdhCATHB, oligonucleotides containing
a high affinity Abd-B binding site (42) were annealed, multimerized,
and cloned into pBluescriptIISK+ (Stratagene) at the
BamHI site. A plasmid containing five tandem binding sites
was selected and a HindIII fragment from the
33AdhCAT
effector plasmid (a gift from Dr. J. Lopez) containing the Adh TATA box
and the CAT reporter gene was inserted 3
of the Abd-B binding sites.
The reporter plasmid GB5CAT has been described previously in Yang and
Evans (41).
DNA fragments encoding the three homeodomains and the N domain were amplified by PCR and cloned into pGEX-2T (43) using restriction sites introduced by the PCR primers. The sequence of each set of primers is available upon request. The induction and purification of the GST fusion proteins was performed as described in Ausubel et al. (44). The use of equal amounts of protein in the glutathione beads pull down assay was confirmed by equivalent staining intensities on Coomassie Blue-stained SDS-polyacrylamide gels. The TNT-coupled reticulocyte lysate system (Promega) was used to transcribe and translate the GTFs and TAFs in vitro under conditions recommended by the manufacturer. Plasmids encoding the Drosophila GTFs and TAFs were obtained from the laboratories of Drs. R. Tjian or J. T. Kadonaga, while the human TFIIE subunit clones were obtained from Dr. R. Roeder. Two micrograms of a preformed GST fusion protein-glutathione bead complex was incubated with the indicated amount of 35S-labeled protein at room temperature (25 °C) for 30 min in a 60-µl reaction containing 1 × binding buffer (1 × BB). The 1 × BB contained 25 m Hepes (pH 7.8), 80 m KCl, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 10% glycerol, 1.0 m DTT, 0.1 m EDTA, 2.5 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin, and 5.0 m MgCl2. The beads were pelleted, washed four times with 100 µl of 1 × BB, then boiled in SDS sample buffer (44). Bound proteins were resolved by 12% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for autoradiography. Band quantitation was performed using a Fuji Phoshor-Imaging system. To confirm biological activity of the GST-eve HD fusion protein, we performed a DNA binding experiment using the DNA insert from the plasmid p3102 containing known eve binding sites obtained from Dr. M. Biggin. Ten fmol of labeled DNA was incubated with 1 µg of either GST-eveHD fusion protein or GST protein prebound to glutathione beads in 150 m NaCl, 20 m Tris (pH 7.5), 0.25 m EDTA, 10% glycerol, 6.25 m MgCl2, 0.05% Nonidet P-40, 1 m DTT, 50 µg per ml of sonicated herring sperm DNA, and 1 mg per ml bovine serum albumin at 25 °C for 30 min. The beads were washed twice with binding buffer without DTT, and bound DNA was fractionated on an agarose gel. Under these conditions, DNA binding to GST was not detected while the eve HD fusion protein bound approximately 50% of the input labeled DNA.2
Cell Culture and TransfectionsThe maintenance of the QT6 cells, transfections, and CAT assays were performed as described previously in Zhu and Kuziora (25).
The in Vitro Transcription AssayA crude nuclear extract
was prepared from HeLa cells (obtained from the National Cell Culture
Center) as described in Dignam et al. (45). The in
vitro transcription assay contained 300 ng of the
33AdhCATHB
template, 30 ng of the GST-Abd-BHD fusion protein or 30 ng of GST
protein and 100 µg of nuclear extract in a 50-µl reaction. The
final concentrations of the other reaction components were: 12 m Hepes (pH 7.9), 12% glycerol, 60 m KCl,
0.12 m EDTA, 0.3 m DTT, 12 m
MgCl2, and nucleotide triphosphates at 600 µ
each. The reaction was carried out at 30 °C for 1 h and then
analyzed by primer extension (44). A primer complementary to the CAT
reporter sequence (CATTGGGATATATCAACGGTGG) was used which produced an
extended cDNA product 150 bases in length. For the antibody
inhibition experiments, the nuclear extract was preincubated with the
indicated amount of a polyclonal anti-TFIIE
antibody (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) at 4 °C for 4 h before addition to the
transcription reaction. Products of the primer extension reaction were
fractionated on a denaturing polyacrylamide gel and quantitated using a
Fuji Phosphor-Imaging system.
Transcription initiation requires a number of multisubunit GTFs,
including TFIID, TFIIA, TFIIB, TFIIE, TFIIF, and TFIIH. In
Drosophila, TFIID is composed of TBP and at least eight
BP-
ssociated
actors or TAFs (21,
22). To investigate if homeodomains interact with GTFs or TAFs in
vitro, a series of binding assays were performed with a GST-Abd-B
homeodomain fusion protein and 35S-labeled
Drosophila TAFs, including TAF30
, TAF30
,
TAF40, TAF60, TAF80, TAF110, and TAF150. We also tested the
Drosophila GTFs, TBP, and TFIIB and human TFIIE
and
TFIIE
. Of all GTFs and TAFs tested, binding at levels above that
observed with GST alone was only observed with TFIIE
. Approximately
50% of the input TFIIE
bound to the GST-Abd-B homeodomain fusion
protein (Fig. 1, lanes 1-4). The addition of
20 pmol of a double-stranded oligonucleotide encoding a high affinity
Abd-B homeodomain binding site did not detectably alter the binding
interaction with TFIIE
or affect the negative interaction with the
other GTFs and TAFs.2
.
Labeled TFIIE
was incubated with the indicated GST fusion protein
bound to glutathione beads. Bound proteins were fractionated with
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. The bar graph
represents quantitation of the pictured autoradiograph. The gel was
loaded as follows: lane 1, 50% of the labeled TFIIE
used
as input in the binding reaction; lane 2, glutathione beads;
lane 3, GST protein; lane 4, GST-Abd-B HD;
lane 5, GST-Antp HD; lane 6, GST-eve HD;
lane 7, GST-N domain.
Homeodomains can be divided into classes based on sequence homology
within and outside the homeodomain region (23, 24). Since the
Abdominal-B homeodomain is representative of a relatively small class,
we asked if sequence differences found in homeodomains of various
classes can affect binding to TFIIE
in vitro. A
representative of the Antennapedia class, the Drosophila
Antennapedia homeodomain (AntpHD), binds to approximately 60% of input
labeled TFIIE
(Fig. 1, lane 5). In contrast, a
representative of a more diverged class of homeodomains, the
Drosophila even-skipped homeodomain (eveHD), fails to bind
TFIIE
at levels above that retained by GST alone under identical
conditions (Fig. 1, lane 6). The eveHD binds a labeled DNA
fragment containing known eve binding sites, suggesting that the fusion
protein retained biological activity.2 These results
indicate that sequence differences among homeodomain classes can affect
TFIIE
binding affinity in vitro.
We next asked if the interaction observed in vitro between
the Abd-B homeodomain and TFIIE
could occur in vivo. We
reasoned that in cultured cells, artificially high concentrations of
TFIIE
might interfere with the ability of proteins containing the
Abd-B homeodomain to regulate transcription by blocking interaction
with the basal transcription complex. We have shown previously that the
Abd-B homeodomain can weakly stimulate transcription, but at levels
that would be insufficient for accurately measuring changes in response
to high TFIIE
concentration (25). To obtain higher levels of
transcriptional activation, we used the Dfd
AC/Abd-B protein, which
essentially consists of the Abd-B homeodomain fused to an activation
domain found in the Deformed homeotic protein called the N domain (25).
Sequences encoding this protein were cloned downstream of the RSV LTR
promoter to create RSV-NHD (Fig. 2A).
Transfection of RSV-NHD activates transcription approximately 20-fold
above levels observed upon transfection of the
33AdhCATHB reporter
plasmid alone (data not shown). To obtain a high cellular concentration
of TFIIE
, we constructed the expression plasmid RSV-TFIIE
in
which coding sequences from a TFIIE
cDNA are placed downstream
of a RSV LTR promoter (Fig. 2A). As shown in Fig.
2B, cotransfection of RSV-NHD with increasing amounts of
RSV-TFIIE
results in up to approximately 60% reduction in CAT
activity without significantly affecting the level of transcription in
the absence of RSV-NHD. We conclude that exogenous TFIIE
interferes
with the ability of the Dfd
AC/Abd-B protein to interact with the
transcription complex.
in
vivo. A, diagram of the reporter and effector
constructs used in the transfection assays. Expression of effector
construct is driven by the RSV LTR promoter. The abbreviations are:
HB5, five tandem Abd-B binding sites; GB5, five
tandem Gal4 binding sites; DB, DNA binding domain. Drawings
are not to scale. B, relative levels of CAT activity in the
presence (solid bars) or absence (striped bars)
of effector constructs and increasing amounts of TFIIE
. All values
are compared with CAT activity levels obtained in the absence of
TFIIE
. The data represent the average of three independent
experiments with the RSV-NHD and two independent experiments with the
remaining effector constructs. Standard deviation is indicated by the
bars.
Several lines of evidence suggest that the inhibition described above
is due to an interaction between TFIIE
and the Abd-B homeodomain
rather than with other regions of the Dfd
AC/Abd-B protein or other
transcription factors. First, a GST-N domain fusion protein does not
bind to TFIIE
(Fig. 1, lane 7). To confirm this
observation in vivo, we cotransfected a construct encoding a
Gal4 DNA binding domain-N domain fusion protein (RSV-GN;
Fig. 2A) and RSV-TFIIE
with a CAT reporter plasmid
bearing 5 tandem Gal4 DNA binding sites (GB5CAT; Fig. 2A).
As shown in Fig. 2B, the level of CAT reporter activation by
RSV-GN is only reduced by approximately 10% in the presence of high
concentrations of TFIIE
, indicating that TFIIE
does not
significantly interact in vivo with the Gal4-N domain fusion
protein. As a third control, we made use of the observation that the
VP16 acidic activation domain interacts with TAF40, TBP, and TFIIB, but
does not interact with TFIIE
(26). As shown in Fig. 2B,
cotransfection with RSV-TFIIE
does not significantly affect the
activity of a fusion protein consisting of the VP16 acidic activation
domain and the Gal4 DNA binding domain. These experiments show that
only a construct containing an Abd-B homeodomain is affected by
overexpression of TFIIE
, suggesting a specific interaction is
possible in vivo between the homeodomain and the TFIIE
subunit.
We next asked if an interaction between the Abd-B homeodomain and
TFIIE
could enhance transcriptional regulation. We tested the
ability of the GST-Abd-B homeodomain fusion protein to stimulate
transcription in vitro using a HeLa cell nuclear extract.
The GST-Abd-B homeodomain fusion protein stimulates transcription
approximately 2.5-fold using the
33AdhCATHB reporter construct as a
template (Fig. 3, columns 1-3). Activated
transcription was not observed from the
33AdhCAT reporter construct
which lacks Abd-B binding sites (data not shown). The modest activation
mediated by the Abd-B homeodomain can be blocked by preincubating the
nuclear extract with increasing amounts of anti-TFIIE
antibody,
without affecting basal transcription levels (Fig. 3, columns
4-11). These results support the hypothesis that the Abd-B
homeodomain can contribute to transcriptional regulation through
interaction with TFIIE
.
antibody.
Primer extension analysis of the in vitro transcription
assay products was performed. The bar graph summarizes the
results after quantification and normalization to unactivated levels of
transcription (column 2). The GST protein control has little
effect on transcription (column 1), while the Abd-B
homeodomain is able to activate transcription (column 3).
Preincubation of the nuclear extract with increasing amounts of a
polyclonal anti-TFIIE
antibody eliminated the activated
transcription mediated by the Abd-B homeodomain (columns 5, 7, 9, and 11) but without affecting transcription in the
absence of activator (columns 4, 6, 8, and 10).
Experiments involving the Abd-B homeodomain were performed at least
twice, and the data are presented as the average result with the
standard deviation indicated by the bars.
The three-dimensional structures of several homeodomain-DNA
complexes reveal that homeodomains with diverged primary sequences are
folded into remarkably similar globular structures (27, 28, 29, 30). Mutational
analysis of protein-protein interactions involving the homeodomain have
identified several amino acids that are involved in determining the
specificity of the interaction (10, 31, 32). In general, these amino
acids are considered to be solvent exposed as they are positioned on
the opposite side of the homeodomain that contacts DNA. Residues in
positions 11, 14, 15, and 22 of helix one, positions 32 and 36 of helix
two, and position 24 in the intervening loop have been implicated in
homeodomain-protein interactions and are identical or similar in the
Antp and Abd-B homeodomains, but have different biochemical properties
in the eve class homeodomains. One or more of these amino acids are
likely to play a role in determining the specificity of the TFIIE
interaction with the homeodomain.
How can an interaction between TFIIE
and the homeodomain contribute
to transcriptional regulation? At a biochemical level, TFIIE promotes
the phosphorylation of the carboxyl-terminal domain (CTD) of RNA
polymerase II by TFIIH (33, 34), but also inhibits a helicase activity
shown by TFIIH that may be required to unwind the DNA prior to
transcription initiation (35). Since the phosphorylated RNA polymerase
II is the form of the enzyme that actively elongates transcripts (36,
37), the ability of a homeodomain to attract TFIIE to the initiation
complex would serve to stimulate transcription by enhancing the kinase
activity of TFIIH, resulting in a completely phosphorylated CTD.
Alternatively, since TFIIE inhibits the helicase activity of TFIIH, it
has been proposed that TFIIE might be removed from the complex
following CTD phosphorylation (38). This is consistent with the
observation that TFIIE binds unphosphorylated RNA polymerase II, but
not to the phosphorylated form (39). Together with conformational
changes that occur in the transcription complex during initiation that
may alter access to the GTFs (40), the removal of TFIIE from the
complex could be facilitated by interaction with a homeodomain. This
scheme might have the added advantage of retaining TFIIE in the
vicinity of the target promoter, thereby aiding subsequent rounds of
initiation.
Unlike the results obtained with the Abd-B and Antp homeodomains, we
failed to detect and interaction between the eve homeodomain and
TFIIE
. In contrast, an interaction between the eve protein and TBP
has been reported (19). The eve homeodomain does not bind TBP in
vitro, but it is required for the interaction between TBP and the
eve repression domain and functions in some undetermined manner to
stabilize the interaction. The mouse Msx-1 protein, which contains a
homeodomain of the eve class, also interacts with TBP in
vitro (20). In this case, a direct interaction between the Msx-1
homeodomain and TBP can be demonstrated. Of particular interest to this
study was the finding that the Msx-1 protein does not interact with
TFIIE
(20). Thus homeodomains differ in their ability to interact
with GTFs. Given the degree of sequence similarity within a homeodomain
class, the interactions with specific GTFs may also be conserved. It
follows that homeodomain-mediated interactions with other highly
conserved proteins such as extradenticle/Pbx (10, 11) or SRF (12) might
be retained among members of a homeodomain class. These interactions
may be sufficient for orthologous vertebrate Hox proteins to
partially mimic the transcriptional regulation of appropriate target
promoters in fly embryos despite the lack of significant sequence
homology outside of the homeodomain region.
We thank the laboratories of B. Tjian, J. T. Kadonaga, and R. Roeder for generously sharing transcription factor clones; Dr. Mark Biggin for the plasmid containing eve binding sites, and the National Cell Culture Center for providing the HeLa cells. We thank K. Arndt and W. McGinnis for comments on the manuscript and J. Zhang for advice and assistance.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H. Shi, X. Fan, A. Sevilimedu, and J. T. Lis RNA aptamers directed to discrete functional sites on a single protein structural domain PNAS, March 6, 2007; 104(10): 3742 - 3746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Zanton and B. F. Pugh Full and partial genome-wide assembly and disassembly of the yeast transcription machinery in response to heat shock. Genes & Dev., August 15, 2006; 20(16): 2250 - 2265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. E. Bondos, X.-X. Tan, and K. S. Matthews Physical and Genetic Interactions Link Hox Function with Diverse Transcription Factors and Cell Signaling Proteins Mol. Cell. Proteomics, May 1, 2006; 5(5): 824 - 834. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. E. Bondos, D. J. Catanese Jr., X.-X. Tan, A. Bicknell, L. Li, and K. S. Matthews Hox Transcription Factor Ultrabithorax Ib Physically and Genetically Interacts with Disconnected Interacting Protein 1, a Double-stranded RNA-binding Protein J. Biol. Chem., June 18, 2004; 279(25): 26433 - 26444. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Tijms and E. J. Snijder Equine arteritis virus non-structural protein 1, an essential factor for viral subgenomic mRNA synthesis, interacts with the cellular transcription co-factor p100 J. Gen. Virol., September 1, 2003; 84(9): 2317 - 2322. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Tang, T.-C. Suen, R. R. McInnes, and M. Buchwald Association of the TLX-2 Homeodomain and 14-3-3eta Signaling Proteins J. Biol. Chem., September 25, 1998; 273(39): 25356 - 25363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Yokomori, C. P. Verrijzer, and R. Tjian An interplay between TATA box-binding protein and transcription factors IIE and IIA modulates DNA binding and transcription PNAS, June 9, 1998; 95(12): 6722 - 6727. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Hampsey Molecular Genetics of the RNA Polymerase II General Transcriptional Machinery Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., June 1, 1998; 62(2): 465 - 503. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Mikkola, J.-A. Bruun, T. Holm, and T. Johansen Superactivation of Pax6-mediated Transactivation from Paired Domain-binding Sites by DNA-independent Recruitment of Different Homeodomain Proteins J. Biol. Chem., February 2, 2001; 276(6): 4109 - 4118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |